Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

update eslint-import-resolver-webpack homepage to the source of the p… #997

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 28, 2018

Conversation

graingert
Copy link
Contributor

…ackage

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jan 8, 2018

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 96.21% when pulling 1753242 on graingert:patch-1 into 0d44914 on benmosher:master.

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
"bugs": {
"url": "https://github.com/benmosher/eslint-plugin-import/issues"
},
"homepage": "https://github.com/benmosher/eslint-plugin-import#readme",
"homepage": "https://github.com/benmosher/eslint-plugin-import/tree/master/resolvers/webpack",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hardcoding "master" here is dangerous; I think maybe https://github.com/benmosher/eslint-plugin-import#resolvers is a better place to link to

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was just following the pattern in the babel lerna repo. I very much doubt git's going to change the default branch from master any time soon.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

github wouldn't, but any maintainer might - that's not the danger i'm concerned with. I don't want to link to a directory that might disappear in a future refactoring.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I get what you're saying @ljharb, but this looks reasonable enough, especially if this is a well-known lerna pattern.

Copy link
Member

@ljharb ljharb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also, should the node resolver be updated also?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants